3 ms·

The conclusion makes it clear that every expert they spoke to made it unambiguously clear that helmets should be worn: > Regardless, experts I spoke to were un

The conclusion makes it clear that every expert they spoke to made it unambiguously clear that helmets should be worn: > Regardless, experts I spoke to were unanimous about what these flaws don’t mean: that helmets are useless. They all believe you should wear one. This is one of those articles that reads like a lot of claims against something, even though the conclusion is very clearly in favor of it. There are some valid concerns about how bike safety needs to extend beyond just the helmet, but the middle sections trying to suggest that maybe helmets are bad just feels like bait.

twiss 4y ago
The conclusion is not in contradiction with the rest of the article. What makes sense for society to do (improve infrastructure) is not necessarily the same as what might make sense for an individual to do (wear a helmet, especially if the infrastructure is insufficient).
aksss 4y ago
Every expert would tell me not to ride a OneWheel at a high rate of speed. Doesn’t mean I won’t. Doesn’t mean I’d support city ordinances banning them. Risk evaluation is weird that way, and your answer will depend on your role in the conversation. What I would recommend for you may not be the best for me. So putting a pin in that, there are arguably more important considerations when evaluating the proposition that, “somebody should make a law”, than expert risk analysis for the genpop.
- tommiegannert 4y ago
  > Risk evaluation is weird that way, and your answer will depend on your role in the conversation. What I would recommend for you may not be the best for me. Asking the "why" one or two more levels, we end up in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimism_bias https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimism_bias. Which suggests you should let someone else evaluate the risk to you.
pwinnski 4y ago
In a society shaped by misguided efforts to keep bike riders safe, the smart move for any individual cyclist is to wear a helmet. Better for all would be to reshape society so that helmets weren't required, but in the US, at least, that's not where we are, so for now: wear a helmet.

twiss 4y ago

The conclusion is not in contradiction with the rest of the article. What makes sense for society to do (improve infrastructure) is not necessarily the same as what might make sense for an individual to do (wear a helmet, especially if the infrastructure is insufficient).

aksss 4y ago

Every expert would tell me not to ride a OneWheel at a high rate of speed. Doesn’t mean I won’t. Doesn’t mean I’d support city ordinances banning them. Risk evaluation is weird that way, and your answer will depend on your role in the conversation. What I would recommend for you may not be the best for me. So putting a pin in that, there are arguably more important considerations when evaluating the proposition that, “somebody should make a law”, than expert risk analysis for the genpop.

tommiegannert 4y ago
> Risk evaluation is weird that way, and your answer will depend on your role in the conversation. What I would recommend for you may not be the best for me. Asking the "why" one or two more levels, we end up in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimism_bias https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimism_bias. Which suggests you should let someone else evaluate the risk to you.

pwinnski 4y ago

In a society shaped by misguided efforts to keep bike riders safe, the smart move for any individual cyclist is to wear a helmet. Better for all would be to reshape society so that helmets weren't required, but in the US, at least, that's not where we are, so for now: wear a helmet.